Evaluation of GeneXpert and advanced biological laboratories UltraGene HCV diagnostic detection and performance against Roche real time PCR in Myanmar.

BACKGROUND: Developing countries experience limited access to HCV laboratory tests for different reasons. Providing near to real-time HCV testing and results especially to at-risk populations including those in rural settings for timely initiation to treatment is key. Within a rural Myanmar setting, we compared HCV diagnostic detection and quantification of the GeneXpert, and Advanced Biological Laboratories UltraGene-HCV assays against the gold standard and reference method Roche real-time HCV in Myanmar. METHODS: Blood samples from 158 high-risk individuals were assessed using three different methods at baseline. Results were checked for normality and log transformed. Log differences and bias between methods were calculated and correlated. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to determine the association of HCV viral loads across all methods. The level of agreement with the standard method (Roche real time HCV) was assessed using Bland-Altman analyses. RESULTS: There was a strong positive correlation coefficient between all three methods with GeneXpert and Roche having the strongest, r = 0.96, (p<0.001). Compared to Roche, ABL (mean difference, 95 % limits of agreement; -0.063 and -1.4 to 1.3 Log10IU/mL) and GeneXpert (mean difference, 95 % limits of agreement; -0.28 and -0.7 to 1.8 Log10IU/mL) showed a good level of agreement with the GeneXpert being slightly superior. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate the excellent performance and no-inferiority, in terms of levels of agreements of both GeneXpert and ABL compared to the Roche platform and supporting the use of the POC assays as alternative a cost-effective methods in HCV detection and diagnosis in developing and low resource settings countries.

Treatment outcomes and costs of a simplified antiretroviral treatment strategy for hepatitis C among Hepatitis C Virus and Human Immuno deficiency Virus co-infected patients in Ukraine.

Background and Aim: To demonstrate the use of a standard dose of ledipasvir (LDV) and sofosbuvir (SOF), with or without ribavirin, to treat hepatitis C and hepatitis C/HIV co-infection in Ukraine. Methods: Eligible HCV viraemic adults from two clinics in Kyiv were treated with LDV/SOF with or without weight-based ribavirin for 12 weeks. Clinical assessments were performed at screening and at week 24, and as needed; treatment was dispensed every 4 weeks. The primary outcome was sustained virologic response (SVR) 12 weeks after treatment, with analysis by intention to treat. Cost per patient was estimated in USD (2018) over the 24-week period. Results: Of 868 patients included in the study and initiated on therapy, 482 (55.5%) were co-infected with HIV. The common genotypes were 1 (74.1%) and 3 (22%). Overall, SVR was achieved in 831 of the 868 patients (95.7%). SVR in patients with hepatitis C alone and hepatitis C/HIV co-infection was 98.4% and 93.6%, respectively. Adverse events were infrequent and usually mild. Using generic medication, cost per patient was estimated at US$680. Conclusion: A standard dose of LDV and SOF, with ribavirin as per protocol, resulted in good outcomes for patients with both hepatitis C alone and co-infected with hepatitis C/HIV. Program costs in Ukraine were modest using generic medication.

Self-Sampling for SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic Testing by Using Nasal and Saliva Specimens: Protocol for Usability and Clinical Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 is a novel coronavirus discovered in December 2019 and is currently the cause of the global COVID-19 pandemic. A critical aspect of fighting this pandemic is to obtain accurate and timely test results so that patients who have tested positive for COVID-19 can be identified and isolated to reduce the spread of the virus. Research has shown that saliva is a promising candidate for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics because its collection is minimally invasive and can be reliably self-administered. However, little research has been conducted on saliva testing and SARS-CoV-2 self-sampling (SARS-CoV-2SS) in Sub-Saharan Africa. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study is to comparatively evaluate the clinical sensitivity and specificity of nasal and oral samples self-collected by individuals for SARS-CoV-2 testing against a reference method involving sample collection and testing by a health care professional. The secondary objectives of this study are to evaluate the usability of nasal self-sampling and saliva self-sampling as a sample collection method for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing by using failure mode and error assessment. METHODS: Participants will be recruited from the general population by using various methods, Participants will be screened progressively as they present at the clinical trial sites as well as in primary health care catchment areas in the inner city of Johannesburg, South Africa. In the event that recruitment numbers are low, we will use a mobile van to recruit participants from outlying areas of Johannesburg. We aim to enroll 250 participants into this study in approximately 6 weeks. Two sample types-a self-administered nasal swab and a self-administered saliva sample-will be collected from each participant, and a health care professional will collect a third sample by using a nasopharyngeal swab (ie, the standard reference method). RESULTS: This protocol has been approved by the University of the Witwatersrand Human Research Ethics Committee on July 31, 2020 (Protocol number EzCov003). As of May 13, 2021, 120 participants have been enrolled into the study. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2SS may offer many benefits to individuals, by allowing for initial self-identification of symptoms and collection of samples without involving third parties and potential risk of infection provided the sample can be safely processed via a collection system. The results of this study will provide preliminary data on the acceptability, feasibility, and usability of SARS-CoV-2SS among the general population for its future implementation. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/24811.

Treatment outcomes and costs of a simplified antiviral treatment strategy for hepatitis C among monoinfected and HIV and/or hepatitis B virus-co-infected patients in Myanmar.

Access to hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing and treatment is limited in Myanmar. We assessed an integrated HIV and viral hepatitis testing and HCV treatment strategy. Sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) ± weight-based ribavirin for 12 weeks was provided at three treatment sites in Myanmar and sustained virologic response (SVR) assessed at 12 weeks after treatment. Participants co-infected with HBV were treated concurrently with tenofovir. Cost estimates in 2018 USD were made at Yangon and Mandalay using standard micro-costing methods. 803 participants initiated SOF/VEL; 4.8% were lost to follow-up. SVR was achieved in 680/803 (84.6%) by intention-to-treat analysis. SVR amongst people who inject drugs (PWID) was 79.7% (381/497), but 92.5% among PWID on opioid substitution therapy (OST) (74/80), and 97.4% among non-PWID (298/306). Utilizing data from 492 participants, of whom 93% achieved SVR, the estimated average cost of treatment per patient initiated was $1030 (of which 54% were medication costs), with a production cost per successful outcome (SVR) of $1109 and real-world estimate of $1250. High SVR rates were achieved for non-PWID and PWID on OST. However, the estimated average cost of the intervention (under the assumption of no genotype testing and reduced real-world effectiveness) of $1250/patient is unaffordable for a national elimination strategy. Reductions in the cost of antivirals and linkage to social and behavioural health services including substance use disorder treatment to increase retention and adherence to treatment are critical to HCV elimination in this population.